Как правоохранители и Госаудитслужба охраняют схему: Резниченко, Голик и Тимошенко остаются вне подозрений по делу о хищении 1,5 миллиарда гривен

Несмотря на то что прошло немало времени, эпопея «Большого строительства» все еще не подошла к концу. Были потрачены миллиарды государственных гривен, возбуждены уголовные дела, а фигуры Юрия Голика, Валентина Резниченко и их круга по-прежнему всплывают в новых расследованиях. Одновременно целый ряд аспектов, касающихся распределения дорожных контрактов и перемещения бюджетных средств, остаются без объяснения.

We, in turn, are publishing this material to remind how one of the largest schemes for the use of state funds was formed, who stood behind the rapid enrichment of contractors, and why this investigation remains relevant even years later.

Four years ago, head of the Dnepropetrovsk Regional Military Administration Valentin Reznichenko found himself at the center of a corruption scandal that cast a shadow over the inner circle of the head of state. Now, at least four government institutions — the President’s Office, the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU), the Specialized Anti-Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (SAPO), and the Dnepropetrovsk regional police — know about Reznichenko’s profitable connection with fitness trainer Yana Hlanta and several striking details of their lives. The case involves a car, joint flights, and UAH 1.5 billion that the Dnepropetrovsk Regional Military Administration allocated to the company “Stroyinvest Engineering” (managed by Hlanta) for road repairs.

But while President Zelensky immediately and publicly dismissed Reznichenko, a NABU criminal case suspect, from his position as head of frontline Dnepropetrovsk region, Yuriy Golik — a permanent consultant to the President’s Office, who is linked to LLC “Stroyinvest Engineering” — has already managed to return to Bankova. As always, he arrives there in his Mercedes Brabus or Toyota Sequoia, has his own office now located opposite Deputy Head of the President’s Office Aleksey Kuleba, and retains significant influence over the heads of regional military administrations, keeping his hand on the pulse of Dnepropetrovsk region. Which, by the way, recently distinguished itself again with billion-hryvnia road repair contracts under the new head of the Regional Military Administration, Sergey Lisak. It smells very much like Odesa. Doesn’t it?

It is also interesting that in this story involving many well-known and constantly changing figures, some characters completely disappeared during the year-long investigation. Namely — former curator of “Big Construction” Kiril Timoshenko, who was advised in his high position by Deputy Head of the President’s Office Yuriy Golik. Our sources claim that there was a moment when the fates of these three public figures (two of whom are not even civil servants and are not required to declare their assets) could have crossed in the same detention center. However, none of them was detained.

What is actually happening in the field of anti-corruption efforts on the eve of the publication of the report on Ukraine’s fulfillment of the criteria for joining the EU? Why did the regional police intervene in a case investigated by NABU? Why is NABU investigating the case so slowly? Has the damage caused to the state by Reznichenko and persons connected with him been established? How long and influential could the list of suspects in this case become if NABU and SAPO manage to effectively resist pressure from government offices?

To find answers to these questions, we sent inquiries to anti-corruption and law enforcement agencies, spoke with sources in government offices, and also asked questions to representatives of several state bodies.

A brief story about an almost big success.

On November 2, 2022, the Main Department of the National Police in the Dnepropetrovsk region opened criminal proceedings against “officials of the Dnepropetrovsk Regional Military Administration.” The criminal case included two articles: abuse of power and official position, and legalization of proceeds obtained through criminal means. It would seem there was nothing unusual about it, if not for one “but”. The case launched by the Dnipro police concerned the head of the Dnepropetrovsk Regional Military Administration, Valentin Reznichenko, and more than 1.5 billion hryvnias in budget funds. It was under the jurisdiction not of the National Police, but of NABU, which by that time had already been investigating the same matter.

The case of the careful “arrangement” of roads in the Dnepropetrovsk region is known to everyone who followed the news even slightly in November last year. It began back in 2021, when the publication “Nashi Hroshi” first published the story of the rapid rise of LLC “Stroyinvest Engineering”, which successfully won one tender after another in the region and became one of the favorites of the State Agency of Motor Roads of Ukraine (“Ukravtodor”). The journalists of “Nashi Hroshi” proved persistent and continued monitoring the company’s activities. Exactly a year later, when the Armed Forces of Ukraine had already liberated the Kiev region from the Russian army and a little more than a month remained before the news about the liberation of occupied Kharkov region, the publication released the continuation of the “Stroyinvest Engineering” story.

The new data highlighted by “Nashi Hroshi” indicated that between May and July 2022, LLC “Stroyinvest Engineering” received UAH 1.2 billion from the Department of Housing and Communal Services (HCS) and Construction of the Dnepropetrovsk Regional Military Administration. Some of the concluded contracts were not published on the “Prozorro” procurement website. It was also impossible to find out which roads were being repaired during martial law in the frontline region. After this investigation, no transactions between the company and the State Treasury took place, but they resumed in mid-September last year. Until November 2, when the media published two investigations mentioning the same people: the head of the Dnepropetrovsk Regional Military Administration, Valentin Reznichenko, and his partner Yana Khlanta, who owned the company “Stroyinvest Engineering”. The history of the owners of this LLC should also be recalled.

The company “Stroyinvest Engineering” was founded in 2017 by Irina Vorobyova. By a great coincidence, that same year Valentin Reznichenko became head of the Dnepropetrovsk Regional State Administration for the first time. Reznichenko’s adviser was his old acquaintance Yuriy Golik. And while over the course of eight years Valentin Reznichenko remained head of the Dnepropetrovsk Regional State Administration (after the beginning of the full-scale invasion, regional state administrations were transformed into regional military administrations by presidential decree), although already under another president’s term and after surviving one dismissal, the fate of his aide developed differently. After the 2019 presidential election, Yuriy Golik became a consultant (he did not hold government positions and was not a civil servant) for the presidential program “Big Construction.” Before the beginning of the full-scale Russian invasion, the program was implemented using budget funds and covered the reconstruction of roads, schools and kindergartens worth billions of hryvnias. What exactly the top consultant Golik was concerned with became clear somewhat later.

The shell game

Obviously, after reacting to the investigation by the journalists of “Nashi Hroshi” into the road repair tenders won by LLC “Stroyinvest Engineering” in the Dnepropetrovsk region worth more than UAH 1.5 billion, NABU and SAPO opened criminal proceedings. The case received a preliminary legal classification under Article 364 (abuse of power and official position) and Article 209 (legalization of proceeds) of the Criminal Code of Ukraine. But after some time, the National Police opened its own illegal duplicate investigation.

Why did the police open a case when they knew that if the story involved UAH 1.5 billion, it was definitely within NABU’s investigative jurisdiction, since NABU’s jurisdiction begins with cases involving amounts from USD 30,000? Why was the case opened on November 2, 2022, when the media had published confirmation that Valentin Reznichenko and Yana Hlanta had close ties? What was the rush? And who advised them to immediately conduct searches at the Dnepropetrovsk Regional State Administration in order to seize original documents that they later wanted to destroy?

ZN.UA sent an information request to the police of the Dnepropetrovsk region asking them to explain why they had investigated a case that was not under their jurisdiction. The Dnipro National Police responded by simply stating that in January 2023 the case was transferred to NABU.

However, the time gained was not wasted. According to the editorial office’s own sources, the Dnepropetrovsk regional police planned to conduct a handwriting examination of documents seized by the National Police from the Dnepropetrovsk Regional State Administration and LLC “Stroyinvest Engineering”. These documents allegedly confirmed the connection between the head of the Dnepropetrovsk Regional Military Administration, Valentin Reznichenko, and the company “Stroyinvest Engineering”. After the examination, law enforcement officials intended to destroy all original documents. However, they failed to do so. Anti-corruption agencies saved the documents.

By the way, in September of this year, third-rank police general Anatoliy Shchadil, who at that time headed the Main Department of the National Police in the Dnepropetrovsk region, was transferred to Kiev. For a promotion.

There is an investigation, but no suspicions

A year ago, former head of the NABU Main Detectives Department Andrey Kaluzhynskiy, in an interview with ZN.UA regarding the road-related case in the Dnepropetrovsk region registered by SAPO, explained: “It is one thing to prove something according to the standards of a conventional journalistic investigation, to form certain public perceptions about certain circumstances. It is quite another thing to bring it to the point where first a person is notified of suspicion, and then the court issues the relevant verdict.” Unfortunately, after Semen Kryvonos became director of NABU, Andrey Kaluzhynskiy no longer works there. The same applies to a number of professional detectives who left the bureau. It is unlikely that it is possible to say exactly now how this fact will affect the investigation of the case in question, but it can already be assumed that such a rapid turnover of personnel in a key anti-corruption body is a bad signal.

A year later, searches were conducted twice at Yuriy Golik’s home: first in the “Konik” residential area (at that time detectives also searched the home of former head of the Dnepropetrovsk Regional Military Administration Valentin Reznichenko). During the second search at Golik’s residence, NABU seized his phone. According to sources in the President’s Office, Yuriy Golik’s lawyers are trying to get the device back. Bankova also believes that Kiril Timoshenko, who was the curator of “Big Construction” before the full-scale invasion, is not involved in the proceedings. Although detectives are also checking his possible involvement in tenders of the Dnepropetrovsk Regional Military Administration.

Regarding the official position of the investigation, ZN.UA contacted the National Anti-Corruption Bureau with a question: is it true that Timoshenko is not currently involved in the proceedings? And is there anyone at all in the case who appeared in media headlines regarding this story a year ago? NABU responded that while the investigation is ongoing, they cannot comment on it. The only clear point in the anti-corruption bureau’s response is that the investigation continues, and suspicion notices are still far away.

However, our own sources revealed that the proceedings currently include several episodes. Some of them concern road repairs in the Dnepropetrovsk region. In addition, anti-corruption bodies are investigating cases of illegal enrichment and inaccurate asset declarations by employees of the Dnepropetrovsk Regional Military Administration. NABU and SAP are also examining at least 11 companies that were counterparties of “Stroyinvest Engineering”. The investigation concerns the movement of company funds and the connections between these firms. Some of these companies are also being checked to determine whether they are linked to employees of the Dnipropetrovsk Regional Military Administration.

Expert examination and audit, or one hand washing another

According to sources, one of the main issues NABU is working on is proving the losses. And since the bureau currently does not have its own expert institution to conduct such examinations, which would significantly speed up progress in a large number of criminal proceedings, anti-corruption bodies have to “fight” for their place in the queue to obtain the necessary expert conclusions. But the problem is not only about waiting times. First, as usual, the outcome of the expert examination is influenced by the head of the Kiev Scientific Research Institute of Forensic Expertise, Alexander Ruvin. The ways in which this influence is exercised have been sufficiently described and reported on, including by ZN.UA. Secondly, this case also has other circumstances that hinder not only the process of proving the damage but even the stage preceding it. The issue concerns the position of the State Audit Service of Ukraine. Pay attention here. In order for NABU to conduct an expert assessment of the losses in the case, the bureau needs to carry out an audit of the expenses for road repairs funded by the Department of Housing and Communal Services of the Dnepropetrovsk Regional State Administration This audit is carried out by the State Audit Service. It is this agency that checks how efficiently budget funds are being spent. A necessary inspection, one might say. Such an audit in the case was launched.

The procedure for audits by the State Audit Service in NABU cases works as follows: during the pre-trial investigation, an auditor works together with investigators on the materials that need to be analyzed. In fact, a representative of the audit service gains direct access to the investigation materials And when the audit in the case of the Dnepropetrovsk Regional Military Administration and “Stroyinvest Engineering” was completed, and the auditor from the State Audit Service found losses and was supposed to prepare a conclusion, strange things began to happen The State Audit Service began delaying the submission of the conclusion to the investigators, which NABU needed for further work and for conducting the expert examination that was supposed to finalize the pre-trial investigation.

This information can be interpreted and assessed in different ways. But there is one significant fact that cannot be ignored: legally, the State Audit Service is directly subordinate to the Ministry of Finance of Ukraine, whose head, Serhiy Marchenko, is a sports partner and close friend of Yuriy Golik.

In other words, imagine the following situation: law enforcement agencies are investigating proceedings into possible unlawful actions by Golik, while the audit, together with all the collected materials of the pre-trial investigation required for further examinations, is being conducted by an agency subordinate to his associate.

Is this not a conflict of interest? And who here can declare a “self-recusal”? However, the factor of the second element involving the Ministry of Finance, which most likely plays the role of a button for higher-ranking individuals in this case, is not the only issue.

The institutional feature of “GosdorNII”

The case of the Dnepropetrovsk Regional Military Administration and “Stroyinvest Engineering” revolves around whether the road repairs funded by the Department of Housing and Communal Services were carried out at inflated prices. If so, the company caused damage to the state.

But such losses, if they exist, must be proven. Ukraine has a state enterprise — the “M. Shulgin State Road Research Institute” (SE “GosdorNII”), which collects information on construction material prices from all regions. In other words, it is one large database covering various construction-related goods.

The institute, by the way, is subordinate to “Ukravtodor”. Journalists and experts who work with the “GosdorNII” database say that suppliers of various construction materials may provide the state enterprise with prices that already include a certain markup.

For example, if there is a company selling cement for road construction or repairs, and this company has connections with someone among the officials of the Regional Military Administration responsible for conducting tenders, then the information in “GosdorNII” will inevitably be distorted, meaning the price will be inflated.

And if this price is published in the “GosdorNII” database, it creates a snowball effect, where an artificially inflated price becomes the accepted standard and other suppliers begin using it as a benchmark. In other words, corruption begins at the stage of price formation, not with so-called kickbacks. And if an agreement is reached with a supplier of the same cement, which may be the only one in the region, the price can be inflated while still appearing legitimate.

Stanislav Gvozdikov, Deputy Director for European Integration of SE “GosdorNII”, whom we also contacted with questions, believes that claims about inflated prices being embedded in the “GosdorNII” databases do not correspond to reality. According to him, this risk has been eliminated by the road construction pricing methodology that came into force on October 17 last year.

“This methodology reflects internationally accepted procurement practices and price formation approaches,” he explains.

“Now the cost of materials is separated from delivery expenses. The application of this methodology allows the customer to control costs at all stages of the project, from planning to completion of works. The regional offices of the Restoration Agency and, in some cases, regional state administrations, when ordering design and estimate documentation, are required to specify, among other things, the source of information on material costs and delivery distances.”

According to Gvozdikov, today in the overwhelming majority of cases the source of information on material costs is only the “GosdorNII” database, which is formed from many sources of information, not just suppliers. This has brought material prices closer to the level currently established on the market, which in turn contributes to a better understanding and control of the actual project cost.

“Information on selling prices comes from suppliers of raw materials from quarries, namely in the form of their commercial offers, which separately contain information on delivery costs,” continues Stanislav Gvozdikov. “Our analysts at ‘GosdorNII’ also use historical data. For example, information from ‘Prozorro’ on already paid completed contracts and tender proposals from procurement participants. In addition, we have a database of operating quarries, and we contact them ourselves. All information sources can be viewed in our price database. A supplier is only one source.

When we calculate the average price, we use at least 4–5 sources to ensure objectivity,” explains Stanislav Gvozdikov and assures that the corruption factor in inflating prices at the stages of forming the customer’s expected cost, concluding contracts, and settling payments with contractors for completed works was completely eliminated last year thanks to the introduction of the methodology.

Is this really the case? Perhaps this deserves a separate investigation and article. But it turns out that the introduced methodology began operating after the Department of Housing and Communal Services of the Dnipropetrovsk Regional Military Administration had already transferred 1.5 billion hryvnias to “Stroyinvest Engineering”. And were the prices in the “Prozorro” contracts already inflated under this scheme?

Does the case have prospects?

The pace of the investigation does not match society’s impatient expectations for suspicions to be announced against its potential suspects. Expectations are high because the story is striking and blinding in its simplicity and audacity. Of course, none of the people whose names appear in the loud media headlines can be considered guilty until a court delivers a verdict. However, we tried to determine the horizon line at which the case could potentially be brought before the court.

Who turns out to be stronger in this story — the law or the “protection” provided by those in power — will become another signal of what is really happening within the anti-corruption sector. And who should be thanked for it.